Rienzi, the Last of the Roman Tribunes by Baron Edward Bulwer Lytton Lytton (best summer reads .txt) 📗

Shortly after the Romance of “Rienzi” first appeared, a translation of the biography compiled by Cerceau and Brumoy was published by Mr. Whittaker. The translator, in a short and courteous advertisement, observes, “That it has always been considered as a work of authority; and even Gibbon appears to have relied on it without further research: (Here, however, he does injustice to Gibbon.)...that, “as a record of facts, therefore, the work will, it is presumed, be acceptable to the public.” The translator has fulfilled his duty with accuracy, elegance, and spirit,—and he must forgive me, if, in justice to History and Rienzi, I point out a very few from amongst a great many reasons, why the joint labour of the two worthy Jesuits cannot be considered either a work of authority, or a record of facts. The translator observes in his preface, “that the general outline (of Du Cerceau’s work) was probably furnished by an Italian life written by a contemporary of Rienzi.” The fact, however, is, that Du Cerceau’s book is little more than a wretched paraphrase of that very Italian life mentioned by the translator,—full of blunders, from ignorance of the peculiar and antiquated dialect in which the original is written, and of assumptions by the Jesuit himself, which rest upon no authority whatever. I will first shew, in support of this assertion, what the Italians themselves think of the work of Fathers Brumoy and Du Cerceau. The Signor Zefirino Re, who had proved himself singularly and minutely acquainted with the history of that time, and whose notes to the “Life of Rienzi” are characterized by acknowledged acuteness and research, thus describes the manner in which the two Jesuits compounded this valuable “record of facts.”

“Father Du Cerceau for his work made use of a French translation of the life by the Italian contemporary printed in Bracciano, 1624, executed by Father Sanadon, another Jesuit, from whom he received the MS. This proves that Du Cerceau knew little of our ‘volgar lingua’ of the fourteenth century. But the errors into which he has run shew, that even that little was unknown to his guide, and still less to Father Brumoy, (however learned and reputed the latter might be in French literature,) who, after the death of Du Cerceau, supplied the deficiencies in the first pages of the author’s MS., which were, I know not how, lost; and in this part are found the more striking errors in the work, which shall be noticed in the proper place; in the meantime, one specimen will suffice. In the third chapter, book i., Cola, addressing the Romans, says, ‘Che lo giubileo si approssima, che se la gente, la quale verra al giubileo, li trova sproveduti di annona, le pietre (per metatesi sta scritto le preite) ne porteranno da Roma per rabbia di fame, e le pietre non basteranno a tanta moltitudine. Il francese traduce. Le jubile approche, et vous n’avez ni provisions, ni vivres; les etrangers...trouvent votre ville denue de tout. Ne comptez point sur les secours des gens d’Eglise; ils sortiront de la ville, s’ils n’y trouvent de quoi subsister: et d’ailleurs pourroient-ils suffire a la multitude innombrable, que se trouvera dans vos murs?’” (The English translator could not fail to adopt the Frenchman’s ludicrous mistake.) “Buon Dio!” exclaims the learned Zefirino, “Buon Dio! le pietre prese per tanta gente di chiesa!” (See Preface to Zefirino Re’s edition of the “Life of Rienzi,” page 9, note on Du Cerceau.)

Another blunder little less extraordinary occurs in Chapter vi., in which the ordinances of Rienzi’s Buono Stato are recited.

It is set forth as the third ordinance:—“Che nulla case di Roma sia data per terra per alcuna cagione, ma vada in commune;” which simply means, that the houses of delinquents should in no instance be razed, but added to the community or confiscated. This law being intended partly to meet the barbarous violences with which the excesses and quarrels of the Barons had half dismantled Rome, and principally to repeal some old penal laws by which the houses of a certain class of offenders might be destroyed; but the French translator construes it, “Que nulle maison de Rome ne saroit donnee en propre, pour quelque raison que ce put etre; mais que les revenus en appartiendroient au public!” (The English translator makes this law unintelligible:—“That no family of Rome shall appropriate to their own use what they think fit, but that the revenues shall appertain to the public”!!!—the revenues of what?)

But enough of the blunders arising from ignorance.—I must now be permitted to set before the reader a few of the graver offences of wilful assumption and preposterous invention.

When Rienzi condemned some of the Barons to death, the Pere thus writes; I take the recent translation published by Mr. Whittaker:—

“The next day the Tribune, resolving more than ever to rid himself of his prisoners, ordered tapestries of two colours, red and white, to be laid over the place whereon he held his councils, and which he had made choice of to be the theatre of this bloody tragedy, as the extraordinary tapestry seemed to declare. He afterwards sent a cordelier to every one of the prisoners to administer the sacraments, and then ordered the Capitol bell to be tolled. At that fatal sound and the sight of the confessors, the Lords no longer doubted of sentence of death being passed upon them. They all confessed except the old Colonna, and many received the communion. In the meanwhile the people, naturally prompt to attend, when their first impetuosity had time to calm, could not without pity behold the dismal preparations which were making. The sight of the bloody colour in the tapestry shocked them. On this first impression they joined in opinion in relation to so many illustrious heads now going to be sacrificed, and lamented more their unhappy catastrophe, as no crime had been proved upon them to render them worthy of such barbarous treatment. Above all, the unfortunate Stephen Colonna, whose birth, age, and affable behaviour, commanded respect, excited a particular compassion. An universal silence and sorrow reigned among them. Those who were nearest Rienzi discovered an alteration. They took the opportunity of imploring his mercy towards the prisoners in terms the most affecting and moving.”